Released on 26 March 2026 for the Nintendo Switch, Counter Attack from Forza Games positions itself as a modern warfare FPS with cinematic ambitions. Its marketing promises expansive battlefields, tactical squad coordination, and state-of-the-art visuals — but what players actually experience is much closer to a streamlined, arcade-style shooter designed for quick sessions and reflex-based gameplay.
That discrepancy between presentation and reality characterises much of the experience.
Arcade Roots Beneath a Tactical Shell
Despite its grandiose description, Counter Attack is fundamentally an arcade FPS. Missions are usually short, self-contained encounters that emphasise movement, shooting accuracy, and quick decision-making over long-term strategy or narrative progression.
There are hints of a more complex system beneath the surface—class-based roles such as Assault, Engineer, Support, and Recon are present—but these elements seem more like thematic dressing than deeply integrated mechanics. In practice, gameplay rarely requires the kind of coordinated teamwork the game advertises.
Instead, the experience relies heavily on immediacy. Enemies spawn rapidly, engagements are frequent, and success depends less on tactical planning and more on how quickly you can react under pressure.
For players expecting something akin to a scaled-down military sim, this might seem disappointing. For those seeking pick-up-and-play action, however, the arcade DNA becomes much more appealing.
Gunplay and Movement: The Core Strength
Where Counter Attack finds its strength is in the feel of real-time combat. Movement is quick and responsive, encouraging players to stay mobile rather than depend on cover-based tactics. Sprinting, repositioning, and flanking are all fluid, creating a sense of momentum that suits the game’s arcade style.
Gunplay is similarly straightforward. Weapons feel distinct enough to promote experimentation, but not so complicated that they overwhelm. There’s a clear focus on accessibility — this is a shooter made to be picked up and understood quickly.
The game also introduces traversal tools that enable players to move across terrain more dynamically. While these mechanics are not as revolutionary as the marketing claims, they do add a layer of verticality and unpredictability to engagements.
That said, combat can become repetitive over longer sessions. Enemy behaviour lacks the sophistication necessary to sustain long-term engagement, often relying on predictable patterns rather than adaptive tactics.
Visual Presentation vs Reality
One of the most noticeable aspects of Counter Attack is the gap between its high ambitions and its actual execution.
The game claims to provide “the pinnacle of visuals” with advanced lighting and realism. However, on the Nintendo Switch, the presentation is much more modest. Environments are functional but lack the detail and scope suggested by the game’s description.
Textures are decent, lighting effects are included but not particularly sophisticated, and overall environmental variety is limited. While nothing appears completely broken, it is obvious that the game is pushing beyond what its engine—or platform—can comfortably handle.
That said, performance remains fairly stable, which is arguably more important for a fast-paced shooter. Consistent frame rates help preserve the responsiveness that the gameplay demands, even if visual quality is compromised.
Mission Structure and Modes
The game features several modes centred around familiar objectives: occupation, destruction, and complete elimination. These modes offer some variety, but the core gameplay loop remains largely unchanged.
Players enter a battlefield, face waves of enemies, complete objectives, and move on to the next scenario. There is little narrative progression or meaningful escalation between missions.
The story itself—focused on a global crisis involving blocked trade routes and hidden technologies—is presented in broad strokes. It serves more as a backdrop than a driving force, rarely impacting gameplay in a significant way.
As a result, the experience feels episodic rather than seamless. Each mission is enjoyable on its own, but there is little motivation to invest deeply in the overall campaign.
Tactical Systems: Surface-Level Complexity
One of the more intriguing aspects of Counter Attack is its attempt to incorporate tactical elements typically associated with larger-scale shooters.
The presence of multiple classes suggests a game built around team synergy. However, in practice, these roles lack the depth needed to significantly alter gameplay. Abilities and gadgets exist, but they rarely feel essential to success.
Similarly, the game’s open-field design hints at player-driven strategy, yet most encounters funnel players into straightforward combat scenarios. Opportunities for creative approaches are limited, and the lack of AI complexity further diminishes the need for tactical experimentation.
This creates a disconnect between the game’s stated identity and its actual design. The systems are there but are not fully realised.
Replayability and Longevity
As an arcade-style shooter, Counter Attack focuses on replayability rather than narrative completion. The short mission structure makes it suitable for quick sessions, and there is some appeal in striving for higher efficiency or trying out different weapons.
However, the absence of progression systems—such as meaningful unlocks, upgrades, or customisation—limits long-term engagement. Without a compelling reason to keep playing, the experience can start to feel repetitive quite quickly.
Multiplayer or co-op features could have greatly increased replay value, but their lack (or limited implementation) makes the game feel somewhat isolated.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The strengths of Counter Attack lie in its accessibility and pacing. It offers fast, responsive shooting that is easy to learn and enjoy in short bursts. Movement feels smooth, combat is immediate, and the overall experience avoids unnecessary complexity.
However, its weaknesses come from unfulfilled ambitions. The game presents itself as a large-scale tactical shooter but functions as a much simpler arcade experience. Visuals do not meet expectations, tactical systems lack depth, and mission design becomes repetitive over time.
Final Verdict
Counter Attack is a capable but conflicted shooter. Beneath its ambitious exterior lies a simple arcade FPS that shines in quick, energetic bursts but struggles to hold your interest over the long term.
Players who approach it with the right expectations—seeking fast, accessible action rather than in-depth tactical gameplay—are likely to enjoy its straightforwardness. However, those anticipating a fully realised modern warfare experience may leave feeling disappointed.
It’s a game that works best when you accept what it actually is and not what it claims to be.
